This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/db-wg@ripe.net/
[db-wg] phone number required for person objects
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] phone number required for person objects
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] phone number required for person objects
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
denis walker
ripedenis at gmail.com
Wed May 25 13:55:43 CEST 2022
Hi Gert, Cynthia On Wed, 25 May 2022 at 12:39, Gert Doering via db-wg <db-wg at ripe.net> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 12:22:53PM +0200, Cynthia Revström via db-wg wrote: > > TL;DR: stop requiring the "phone" attribute for person objects. > > > > This is something that I quickly brought up during the db-wg session > > at RIPE84 but thought would be good to bring up here as well. > > > > Currently you need to specify a phone number for person objects but > > not for role objects, which I think should be fixed (as in not require > > it for person objects either). > > I'm not sure I agree - as in "why is there a person/role object in > the first place? -> so I know who to call in case things need an > urgent resolution!". > > And, calling people needs phone numbers... And if they want you to call them, they will offer you an optional phone number. Otherwise you can send them an email or fill in their web form. If someone is operating a network and thinks it is important for anyone to be able to contact them quickly if they detect a problem, they will offer the means to do that, even if it is by using optional data. If their network problems don't need 24/7 cover with immediate problem solving they will respond to an email. > > So, I agree that the inconsistency between person: and role: does not > make much sense (I might see a role: object and want a phone number to > call...) - but the more fundamental question is "if that object is of no > use to a person looking for a point of contact, why have that object > there in the first place?"... An email address or a URL is a point of contact. A natural person working alone from home running a public network may not have the capability to respond to problems with such urgency. So why would they give you a phone number? Not all networks are equal - in size, importance, staffing, operation... There is a fine balance between what a registry needs and what someone is willing to give. If you cross the line, the database will be full of rubbish. Then we have to consider verification on entry and regular validation to ensure it is still correct. cheers denis proposal author > > Gert Doering > -- NetMaster > -- > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? > > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 > -- > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] phone number required for person objects
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] phone number required for person objects
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]